Tabloids should just stay away from science stories. Case in point, this Boston Herald headline bellowing about the “Big Secret” in the Cape Wind windfarm project: millions, in “Hidden Costs.” The story cites the “hidden costs” that cropped up in a similar windfarm plan farther south to support the hysterical headline. That southern windfarm, according to the Herald, will add about $20 to the average annual electric bill in that area. Are we to assume then that these hidden costs in Cape Wind will translate into $20 annually for Bay State rate payers?

Somehow, “hidden millions” sounds a lot worse than “$20 annually.” Is the Herald deliberately distorting the story in the headline to sell papers? Perish the thought! Reading deeper, clearly the story is more tepid than the headline prompting you to read it. It goes on to point out that the hidden millions estimate is also based on unusually low natural gas prices this winter driving the windfarm's comparative power price higher. The story also notes that because the windmills tap a renewable source of energy, the prices of that wind energy will only go down over time while natural gas-generated energy prices will only rise. No mention of the fact that the windfarm will also be less polluting. Hey, if the headline doesn't draw you in, you don't read the story. And, despite the headline, it's a good story.

While we're on the subject of windfarms here's an article saying wind power could replace 20 to 30 percent of the world's oil use. However, all that wind power will do less than previously thought to curb greenhouse gases. The article adds that a lot more improvements are needed to the country's power grid before we can use all that wind power efficiently.